Jaswinder Singh Alias Mithu v. State Of Punjab

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 04.05.2026 JASWINDER SINGH @ MITHU ... PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT Present:- Mr. Sandeep Kumar Bokolia, Advocate for the petitioner. H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral) 1.

This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 (corresponding Section 439 Cr.P.C.) for grant of regular bail in case FIR No. 293 dated 01.08.2025 under Section 105,3(5) BNS (under Sections 304,34 IPC) and (Sections 27,61,85, of the NDPS Act added later on ) registered at Police Station City Kharar, District SAS Nagar (Mohali) 2.

The case of the prosecution is that one-Ramandeep Singh was found dead in the house of co-accused Goldy. It is alleged that co-accused Goldy informed the complainant that Ramandeep Singh was lying in an intoxicated condition at his house. On receiving this information, the complainant reached Goldy's house and took Ramandeep Singh to the hospital, where he was declared dead. Later on, the complainant came to know that the petitioner along with co-accused, namely, Goldy and Sukhraj Singh had administered heavy dose of drugs to Ramandeep Singh which resulted in his death.

-23.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submits that apart from the statement of complainant there is no incriminating material against him which would connect him with the alleged offence. No recovery has been effected from him. It is further submitted that co-accused Goldy, in whose house the dead body was recovered, was declared innocent. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 04 months & 04 days and is not involved in any other case. He, therefore, prays for release of the petitioner on regular bail as the trial is likely to take a long time as charges are yet to be framed.

4.

Notice of motion.

5.

Mr. P.S.Pandher, Assistant A.G.Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. He has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of regular bail to the petitioner. Learned State counsel has filed the custody certificate in Court, which is taken on record. As per the custody certificate, the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 04 months & 04 days. He, upon instructions, submits that although challan has been presented but charges are yet to be framed.

6.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7.

In view of the above submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the fact that the petitioner is in custody for the last more than 04 months & 04 days, he is not involved in any other case and that the trial is likely to take a long time, this Court deems it fit to grant the concession

-3of regular bail to the petitioner during the pendency of the trial as the continuous detention of the petitioner would not serve the ends of justice. 8.

Therefore, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing requisite bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned.

9.

Nothing discussed hereinabove shall be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

10.

It is clarified that if while on bail so granted through the instant order, the petitioner is found indulged in any other criminal case/activity, it shall be open to the State to seek cancellation of his bail. (H.S.GREWAL) 04.05.2026 JUDGE renu Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No